AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

The Obamademocrats are the real problem!

They will not be be concerned with whether or not their means and processes for achieving their ends adhere to the rules of law, or of ethics, or of morality.

Yeah, that's why our founding fathers started the country - to let it be ran by religious zealots! Not so much. In fact, while they themselves were religious people, they considered the mixture of religion and policy to be abhorrent and they would hate our modern situation. It used to be a secret what religion (sect of Christianity, really) the president was, even!

As for the fiscal discipline, another joke. Sure, Republicans cut taxes. But when's the last time they cut spending in any meaningful way? Not during my lifetime!

Cycloptichorn

I oppose the nationalization of schools ...

Denmark is a tiny country with high taxes but the standard of living is extraordinary.

plainoldme wrote:

I oppose the nationalization of schools ...

So, what is your direct experience with the nationalization of schools?
You say you opposed it, but you don't seem to mind that it happened.

I, for one, am sick of reminding these OCD-inflicted ranters that the Founding Fathers were deists.

It is shocking. Just on the basic social level, Eisenhower was a classy person while palin is gauche.

I can't find it, but are you looking for this?

Dwight D. Eisenhower, "Why I Am a Republican," Saturday Evening Post, April 11, 1964.

HEALTH LAW WILL BE COSTLY FOR FLORIDIANS
The nation's new health care law represents a monumental series of missed opportunities. Instead of lowering the cost of health care for Americans, this law will increase costs. Instead of fixing the health care programs for seniors and those who cannot afford insurance, this law cuts Medicare and adds more people to the failing Medicaid system. This law actually cuts $529 billion out of Medicare, the health care plan serving more than 3 million of Florida's seniors, to create a new entitlement program. Instead of letting people keep their existing health care plans, this law will force many families out of their current coverage, says Sen. George LeMieux (R-Fla.).

For Floridians, the new law means:

More than 985,000 Floridians enrolled in Medicare Advantage will likely have their benefits reduced; the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services predict a decrease in Medicare Advantage enrollment somewhere between 33 percent and 64 percent.

According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Florida's small businesses employing 50 or more people will pay either higher health care costs or a new penalty because of new government mandates.

Moreover, many of Florida's 1.2 million college students will continue to pay 6.8 percent interest on unsubsidized student loans:

The health care law allows the federal government to take over the student loan program, saving what CBO estimates is $61 billion over 10 years.

But instead of passing those savings on in the form of lower interest rates, students will continue paying the current rate and some of the savings will fund new health care programs.

Also:

Based on an Oliver Wyman study, the youngest 30 percent of Floridians will pay 35 percent more as premiums rise in the individual market.

Approximately 4.45 million Floridians making less than $200,000 will pay higher taxes, based on estimates by the Joint Committee on Taxation.
Every Floridian's share of the national debt will increase when the cost of paying doctors to see Medicare patients is included (there will be $8,470 in new government spending for every Floridian).

Some 1.5 million low-income Floridians will be added to Florida's Medicaid program even though only 50 percent of doctors nationally are willing to see new Medicaid patients.

Source: Sen. George LeMieux (R-Fla.), "Health law will be costly for Floridians," St. Petersburg Times, April 8, 2010.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=19192&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD
TAXING THE WEALTHY IS BAD NEWS FOR EVERYONE
The new health care law will substantially increase the tax burden of high-income workers and small businesses over the next few years. The tax hikes will reduce the capital stock and discourage small business job creation -- the opposite of what is needed to grow the economy, says Pamela Villarreal, a senior policy analyst with the National Center for Policy Analysis.

Consider:

The 2001 Bush tax cuts reduced the lowest marginal income tax rate from 15 percent to 10 percent and the highest from 39.6 percent to 35 percent.
President Obama proposes to raise the two top marginal rates to 36 and 39.6 percent beginning 2011 for the highest-income earners while leaving the other tax brackets unchanged.

Beginning in 2013, the new health care reform law will impose an additional 0.9 percent Medicare tax on wage income for individuals earning more than $200,000 a year and couples earning more than $250,000.

Additionally, the new law imposes a 3.8 percent Medicare tax on unearned income, such as rent, royalties, dividends and capital gains for the same high-income earners.

The Obama administration also wants to increase long-term capital gains tax rates from 15 percent this year to 20 percent in 2011 for the two highest tax brackets, and taxing dividends at ordinary income tax rates for those earning $200,000 a year or more.

How will this affect the above income groups? Suppose an individual owns $50,000 worth of stock that has accumulated an 8 percent capital gain and 3 percent dividend after one year:

By 2013, the tax on the $4,000 gain (sold after one year) would be as much as $1,309, compared to $825 if the current tax cuts are extended.

With the current capital gains tax rate of 15 percent, the tax on the sale of $50,000 in stock would be $825, and the after-tax rate of return would be 9.35 percent.

If President Obama's proposed capital gains and dividends rates of 20 percent go into effect, along with the new Medicare taxes, the tax bill rises to $1,352 and the after-tax rate of return falls to 8.38 percent.

For ordinary dividends, a higher marginal tax rate and the new Medicare taxes could nearly double the individual's effective (average) tax rate from 15 percent to more than 29 percent.

Thus, for high earners the after-tax rate of return on this type of investment would fall by more than 10 percent, or more than one percentage point, says Villarreal.

Increasing the capital gains tax could lower government tax revenues, because people will hold on to assets in order to avoid the tax. This lock-in effect has been noted when capital gains tax rates increased in the past. Moreover, the lower rate of return resulting from higher taxes may discourage people from investing in certain capital assets in the first place, says Villarreal.

Source: Pamela Villarreal, "Higher Taxes on Capital Gains and Dividends," National Center for Policy Analysis, Brief Analysis No.701, April 8, 2010.